Thread: LCD, LED, Plasma - The debate still continues

LCD or LED or Plasma? Is there a debate?

Well, not really to the Indian consumer. 95% of the consumers used to buy LCD TV (remember that LED is also LCD) a year ago and continue to do so now. A multibrand TV showroom will feature an array of LCDs and LEDs and maybe a couple of plasma panels, most likely none. The only 5% minority that swear by plasma are geeks/videophiles and probably nutters.

But this is the Indian context. Worldwide plasma sales are neck to neck with LCD/LEDs. But say what you will, plasma will offer better picture quality than the best LEDs of today. Things may change in future but that is another story. My argument is thus. The next time you walk into a TV showroom, find out the most knowledgeable guy in the salesteam and ask him the question, "I am confused between plasma, LED and LCD. Which one will deliver superior picture?". And watch the answer.

Taking the Indian context, why are plasma sales so miniscule compared to the LCD stable? The reasons are not difficult to find/judge:

• People believe that LCD/LED is new technology (correct here) and hence it is better (untrue).
• Wafer thin LED TV looks so sexy (true)
• See more choices in the LCD/LED range (true)
• Plasma is costly (not true)

So once again I shall repeat the pro and cons of either TV (LED and Plasma/PDP):

• Native Contrast Ratio: Forget the Dynamic Contrast Ratio. No one knows how it is measured. But native contrast ratio is defined as the ratio of absolute white to absolute black. NCR on ordinary PDP is more than 20,000:1 (30,000:1 on NeoPDP) while on the best LED panel it will be 15,000:1 (the one in your budget will have less than 8,000:1). This is because LCD always leaks some light. The backlit LED lighting helped to an extent but it is still a problem.
  LED = 0, Plasma = 1
• Black quality: Black is a very important colour and no one realizes this. Black must look black and not gray because if black is not black, all other colours will appear a little or more lighter. In PDP, blacks come out far better because of the high NCR.
  LED = 0, Plasma = 2
• Picture Quality: Picture quality and especially in full-HD is stunning on both but because of superior contrast on PDP, the plasma wins.
  LED = 0, Plasma = 3
• Response Time: The best LED will have a response time of 1 ms; the ones in budget are more like 2 ms. The most ordinary PDP will have a response time of 0.0001 ms. This is because it takes some time for an LCD pixel to completely shut off. How does response time affect us? A fast moving scene will create a ghost trail behind. Watching such programs will cause minor headaches and some dizziness. Don't believe me. Watch the full movie Tron Legacy on a (slow) LCD/LED and see for yourself.
  LED = 0, Plasma = 4
• Size: There can be absolutely no doubt that the latest wafer-thin LED models are just sexy ... mind-blowing/out of the world. You look like having Piggy Chops as your girlfriend. Sometimes, on this point alone an LED is worth buying. An extra point to LED.
  LED = 2, Plasma = 4
• Cost: As I mentioned somewhere else, size per size, the PDP will be by far cheaper than the LEDs. For example, the Panasonic Plamsa 50" model VIERA TH-P50U20D has an MRP of INR 79,990 and retails at 68,000. Comparatively, the slightly smaller Samsung 46" UA46D550 is tagged at INR 93,000 and is available at around 80~82K.
  LED = 2, Plasma = 5
• Power Consumption: 200~220W for the typical LED whereas 320W for the typical PDP.
  LED = 3, Plasma = 5

The most damning opinion I have heard from all around is that PDP is old technology and hence outdated. Nothing can be further than the truth. We are still using the incandescent bulb and that is the technology, more or less perfected in 1920's. Plasma technology continues to be funded and developed further. Plasma is still the choice for large size panels. New technology is not necessarily better.

Some of the older glitches with the PDP technology such as burn-in/etching, low panel life, etc. is no longer true. In my opinion, the plasma still wins.
---------------------------------
Errata:

• Power Consumption: Read 150~180W for the typical LED whereas 320~400W for the typical PDP.

PLASMAS are better, I can garuntee it,
As rightly mentioned by just4kix, they cost less and the ovet all quality is awesome.
also agree on the fact that new LED's look so sexy! esp the monolithic design!
plasmas are bulkier and more delicate but heck, what you look at a turned off sexy TV or a turned on OMFG quality TV?

1 MYTH I want to bust is of the Life span of Plasmas
What is life span of a TV?
Life span of a TV is the time when the constrast of the TV will fall to 50% of the current value. (like the image of contrast 100 will look the same after its life span as on at 50 on a new TV) ALL TV's lose contrast, even LCD's. The average life of new LCD's is 60,000 HRS that translates
41 YEARS at 4hr per day
20 YEARS at 8hr per day.
Now plasmas were (before 2005) were having a short life span of 10,000 to 20,000 hrs
It got doubled in the past and is now nearly 1,00,000 hrs (company claims) even if it is 80,000 hrs that translates
54 years at 4 hrs per day
27 years at 8 hrs per day
So plasmas have already exceeded the life span of LCD's.

Plasmas just need some more care (run-in) and with little knowledge you can get it right

I would like to correct the Power consumption
for size per size plasmas nearly consume double the power than the LCD's
a 50" sony LCD will comsume nearly 160W power where as a 50" plasma(panasonic) consumes 450W of power

Thanks for the insight! I had some misconceptions myself until I read this thread.

Originally Posted by iLEOLED

It got doubled in the past and is now nearly 1,00,000 hrs (company claims) even if it is 80,000 hrs that translates
54 years at 4 hrs per day
27 years at 8 hrs per day
So plasmas have already exceeded the life span of LCD's.

in 54 years we will have techniques to have real people before us, i guess.

Thanks for restarting this topic. I had this debate with a friend... LED vs Plasma. He was saying those things like LED is latest technology, hence, better. I was vouching for Plasma and told him about better contrast ratio and response time.. Now, I can show him this thread.

Originally Posted by itsmemad

Thanks for restarting this topic. I had this debate with a friend... LED vs Plasma. He was saying those things like LED is latest technology, hence, better. I was vouching for Plasma and told him about better contrast ratio and response time.. Now, I can show him this thread.

I hear this "latest technology" argument often. For those whom it matters, LED TVs are either edge-lit or back-lit LCD panels. So may be a "latest innovation" but certainly not the latest technology.

And what does "latest technology" mean? Let us for the sake of argument accept that "LCD/LED" is the latest technology. But perhaps in 5 years OLED may replace LCD/LED. So where does this leave you? Does it mean that your TV will be automatically upgraded?

I have put forward most of the facts that appeal to the viewer. If there are more aspects that need to be considered, suggestions are welcome.

I think we have been mocking LCD too much
LCD also have certain advantages
SO when to consider an LCD?

1. Size
Plasmas dont come in small sizes the least you will get is 42 Inches, and the real advantage of plasma is in even bigger sizes >=46 Inches.
I personally found a 40" LCD more better than a 42" plasma in terms of display

2. Use (more of Gaming/News)
Plasmas are not bad for gaming but LCD can produce vivid colors better and hence games can be enjoyed more on a LCD, Plasmas produce more natural colors. Continuous gaming and news can damage a plasma and cause burn-in. In games the HUD menus are static and news channels contain static bars etc. So if your main purpose is just watching news/Gaming better consider an LCD

3. Portability
I doubt how many people will this thing a benefit but LCD sure are more lightweight and portable, they can withstand big jerks etc, Plasmas on this point are delicate and heavy.

4. Power Consumption
LCD consume much less power with the introduction to LED back-lighting.
A 50" LCD will consume 160-180 Watts, whereas a 50" plasma will consume nearly >2.5x power 400-450 W

1. I had already commented upon the size aspect and given an extra point to LED.
2. Gaming use and burn-in: Not entirely accurate. Modern PDPs are quite resistant to burn-in and a small (very minor) burn-in happens in case LCD also. Agree on the rest.
3. Portability: Related to size. Beyond 32", the LCD/LED is just as risky to move without professional help.
4. Power consumption: Already covered but was in slight error. Corrected now.

@ Just4kix all the info you provided is 100% correct,
I was just highlighting the advantages of LCD

Ya modern PDP are resistant to burn-in but still there is a chance when the panel is new, my friend has a plasma and didn't quite know about burn in, sadly he burned the GTA Sanandreas HUD outlines (he plays daily for hours tough), his plasma is about 2-3 years old now, and the burn-in has faded too, now it is barely noticeable in normal viewing.

Some additional LCD advantages:

• Ambient Light conditions: Plasma is at a disadvantage in a well lit room whereas LCD works well in such situations. Conversely, in a dim lit room, the LCD will appear too bright. If you lower the brightness in such cases, the colours will fade and look very dull.
• Screen reflection: Most PDPs have high screen reflection and this is a problem if the light is directly in front of the screen on the opposite wall. For example, you may see a tubelight reflecting very clearly on the plasma screen. On the other hand, LCD screen hardly reflect anything.

Originally Posted by iLEOLED

@ Just4kix all the info you provided is 100% correct,
I was just highlighting the advantages of LCD

Ya modern PDP are resistant to burn-in but still there is a chance when the panel is new, my friend has a plasma and didn't quite know about burn in, sadly he burned the GTA Sanandreas HUD outlines (he plays daily for hours tough), his plasma is about 2-3 years old now, and the burn-in has faded too, now it is barely noticeable in normal viewing.

Burn-in was a huge issue in older plasma screens. This photo describes burn-in so vividly that perhaps no one will ever buy a plasma...



Your friend may take some tips from this site: What is plasma burn-in, and how to fight it

you Pointed out the crucial points here,
I had to attach curtains to the balcony opposite to the tv to avoid the reflection. Guys take care while choosing a spot to place your TV, I had no choice, If you have a choice consider the two factors told by just4kix above, its very important, reflection of light/objects can be very irritating, esp while watching movies.

Does anyone know how much extra electricity does a plasma use as compared to an LCD in money terms per hour kind of thing? I suppose not many people even know that a plasma uses more electricity else the sole reason for people buying an LCD would have been saving electricity.

Originally Posted by Admin

Does anyone know how much extra electricity does a plasma use as compared to an LCD in money terms per hour kind of thing? I suppose not many people even know that a plasma uses more electricity else the sole reason for people buying an LCD would have been saving electricity.

I have done some equations some time back as follows:

Parameters:

1. 46" LCD/LED = 180W/hr, 50" plasma = 350W/hr.
2. Average usage per day = 6 hours
3. Electricity charges per unit (1KWH) = Rs. 5
4. Service tax + Education Cess = 10.3%

So here are the computations:
LCD/LED:

1. Monthly usage = (180 * 6 * 30)/1000 = 32.4 KWH or 32.4 units
2. Total Electricity charges = (32.4 * 5) = Rs. 162
3. Service tax + Education Cess = Rs. 16.69
4. Total = Rs. 178.69

Plasma:

1. Monthly usage = (350 * 6 * 30)/1000 = 63 KWH or 63 units
2. Total Electricity charges = (32.4 * 5) = Rs. 315
3. Service tax + Education Cess = Rs. 32.44
4. Total = Rs. 347.44

Difference = Rs. 168.75

------
@ILOLED, The plasma will not consume 450W. That is the maximum consumption of plasma if kept on full white mode.

Please delete my previous post (not able to see delete option)

Ya you are right I messed up almost all the figures

click EDIT in your previous post and delete .
say deleted due to errors.

Sorry for this late reply. I only saw this thread now.
I have a 42inch LG plasma. Before buying it I saw the same channel in LCD and Plasma and plasma looked natural over LCD. Even now when many people visit my house they are amazed by the natural look of the TV channels.

And strangely here's a info that all of you won't agree with.

I tried tatasky but reverted back to cable TV. I have a 42 inch lg plasma.
It's funny that cable tv has better quality. The video looks natural. And it's also cheap(Rs 100 per month). Many in my area use different dth and feel the same. Probably as more and more HD channels are launched dth will take over. But that said the newly launched movies now channel looks excellent in my cable tv

^^^ Digital cable is as good as DTH - and surprise, surprise - can be better than DTH. Analogue cable (one without STB, etc.) can be better for some channels but fuzzy/grainy/snowy for other channels.

Digital HD cable is also being offered now.